Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Tobacco Control List-Serve Admits that It Expelled Rest of the Story Author Because He Was Critical of Anti-Smoking Groups and Expressed Disagreement

It is now official. McCarthyism is alive and well in the anti-smoking movement.

Yesterday, the list-serve which expelled me for what I claimed was my gall to express disagreement with the established wisdom of the tobacco control movement has publicly acknowledged that the reason I was expelled was that I had the gall to express disagreement with the established wisdom of the tobacco control movement.

Back in December 2005, I wrote - in response to my expulsion - that: "the tobacco control movement simply cannot tolerate any dissent. ... in response to speaking out to suggest that perhaps some of the things we are doing are not appropriate, the movement resorts to attacking the messenger, and now censoring that individual's free expression of opinion. ... What is really being said is that I disagreed with some of the dogmatic views of the movement. In this case, that's what interference means: disagreeing with the mentality of the movement. There clearly is no room for dissent in the tobacco control movement, and dissent is met not only with personal attacks, but now, with outright censorship."

It turns out that what I opined was exactly correct, and the list-serve has now publicly acknowledged that. In a message sent to the list-serve today, an administrator wrote that I was expelled from the list-serve for two reasons:

(1) for criticizing health organizations for misrepresenting scientific evidence about the risks of brief secondhand smoke exposure; and

(2) for criticizing health organizations for supporting various policies, such as firing all smokers at workplaces and making smoking around children a form of child abuse.

The administrator wrote: "Mike Siegel has misrepresented his expulsion from tp-talk as due solely to his criticism of health organizations for misrepresenting scientific evidence about short term 2nd hand smoke risks, when Mike's expulsion from tp-talk was also due to Mike's ad hominem attacks on health organizations for merely not agreeing with Mike's adamant opposition to: - smokefree workplace laws that exempt even one workplace (i.e. every smokefree workplace law), - outdoor smokefree laws for playgrounds, parks, beaches, near building entrances, etc., - laws and other public policies that protect children from tobacco smoke pollution exposure, - cigarette tax hikes, and - smokefree hiring/firing policies adopted by employers. "

The Rest of the Story

So my expulsion from the tobacco control list-serve was not only for my "criticism of health organizations for misrepresenting scientific evidence about short term 2nd hand smoke risks."

Which means that my expulsion from the tobacco control list-serve, according to the list-serve itself, was in part due to my "criticism of health organizations for misrepresenting scientific evidence about short term 2nd hand smoke risks."

So let's get this straight. You can participate on a tobacco control list-serve and take part in discussions all you want; however, you are not free to criticize any health organizations, even if they are misrepresenting scientific evidence to the public.

That bears repeating, especially because these are the admitted sentiments of the tobacco control list-serve administration, not my own: You can participate on a tobacco control list-serve and take part in discussions all you want; however, you are not free to criticize any health organizations, even if they are misrepresenting scientific evidence to the public.

The other admitted reason for my expulsion was that I expressed disagreement with and criticized health organizations for supporting certain policies, including policies by which employers fire all their smokers and refuse to hire any smokers and policies by which parents who smoke around their children are treated as child abusers.

So let's get that straight. You are not free to disagree with the policies being supported by anti-smoking groups. You have to agree with everything they do. You have to support every policy they support. Or at least keep quiet if you disagree.

That bears repeating, especially because these are the admitted sentiments of the tobacco control list-serve administration, not my own: You are not free to disagree with the policies being supported by anti-smoking groups. You have to agree with everything they do. You have to support every policy they support. Or at least keep quiet if you disagree.

Clearly, there is no room for dissent in tobacco control. Certainly not on its list-serves.

Disagreeing with anti-smoking organizations and their policies is not allowed. Criticizing tobacco control groups is not allowed.

You have no choice but either to go along with the established wisdom of the movement or to be quiet. If you express a difference of opinion, you are - in the eyes of the movement - subject to expulsion and therefore, to censorship.

The rest of the story is that the list-serve from which I was expelled has now publicly admitted that it committed outright censorship: I was kicked off the list-serve because I was expressing criticism of anti-smoking groups and opposition to certain [arguably radical] anti-smoking policies.

Interestingly, the main focus of my criticism of anti-smoking groups was that they are misrepresenting scientific information, which I view as a violation of the most basic ethical principle of public health.

The main focus of my criticism of tobacco control policies was that they represented discrimination against smokers and undue invasion of individual employee privacy. I also dared to suggest that smoking around children is not the same thing as physically or sexually abusing a child.

Apparently, if you believe that there is a major difference between exposing a child to secondhand smoke and smacking that child repeatedly so that you break his ribcage, you are simply not welcome in the tobacco control movement. You are, after all, expressing opposition to a policy intended to protect children from secondhand smoke.

Actually, the above statement is wrong. If you believe that there is a major difference between exposing a child to secondhand smoke and smacking that child repeatedly so that you break his ribcage, you are welcome in the tobacco control movement. You are welcome as long as you keep that opinion to yourself. If you express it publicly, then you are subject to censorship and expulsion from the movement.

The administrator of one of the largest and most important tobacco control list-serves has now publicly admitted to outright censorship.

No wonder the tobacco control movement has gone off the deep end in its fanaticism. Anyone who tries to stop it knows that they will be censored or expelled. You have no choice but to go along with the groupthink.

No comments:

About Me

Dr. Siegel is a Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health. He has 32 years of experience in the field of tobacco control. He previously spent two years working at the Office on Smoking and Health at CDC, where he conducted research on secondhand smoke and cigarette advertising. He has published nearly 70 papers related to tobacco. He testified in the landmark Engle lawsuit against the tobacco companies, which resulted in an unprecedented $145 billion verdict against the industry. He teaches social and behavioral sciences, mass communication and public health, and public health advocacy in the Masters of Public Health program.